News
SpaceX’s rocket reusability dream is within reach after fastest recovery yet
SpaceX and CEO Elon Musk’s rocket reusability dream appears to be within reach for the first time ever after technicians managed to retract the most recently-launched Falcon 9 booster’s landing legs and bring it horizontal in record time.
On the heels of a SpaceX’s second orbital-class Falcon 9 launch, landing, and recovery just this month, the recovery milestone could mean that booster B1059 is being prepared for the fastest turnaround in the company’s history. Together, with two Starlink launches now complete less than two weeks into June 2020 and a third internet satellite mission scheduled as early as June 22nd, the odds are better than ever that SpaceX will be able to pull off a record launch cadence heading into the second half of the year.
Averaged out, a sustained frequency of one launch every ~7 days would give SpaceX the ability to perform more than 50 orbital launches annually. In fact, just earlier this year, an environmental impact assessment completed for upgrades at Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Pad 39A revealed plans for as many as 70 annual launches from SpaceX’s two Florida pads by 2023.
Technically, SpaceX has already demonstrated that those two Florida launch pads – KSC Pad 39A and Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS) LC-40 – are able to support 60-70 annual launches when pushed to their limits, with the latter pad recently performing two launches in just nine days for a potential maximum of 40 launches in one year. If SpaceX can pull off four Falcon 9 launches in 27 days, as it’s currently scheduled to do, the company will have already come a majority (75%) of the way to demonstrating that its fleet of Falcon rockets is also up to the task.
Currently the newest flown booster in SpaceX’s Falcon 9 fleet, the company has also wasted no time processing B1059 after ~8 am EDT return to Port Canaveral, kicking off landing leg retraction scarcely eight hours after berthing. B1059’s first sea recovery was also the second use of drone ship Of Course I Still Love You’s (OCISLY) upgraded Octagrabber, a tank-like robot used to keep technicians safe while remotely securing Falcon boosters on the high seas.
Octagrabber 2.0
By all appearances, SpaceX is using a new recovery method debuted with Falcon 9 booster B1058 earlier this month for the second time. With that significant operational tweak, the company no longer has to crane Falcon 9 boosters off of the drone ship before it can begin landing leg retraction – itself a process that’s barely a year old. By entirely supporting a booster with an upgraded Octagrabber robot and retracting its legs in situ, SpaceX can completely skip a recovery processing step, only lifting the rocket once it’s ready to be broken over (brought horizontal) and loaded onto a transporter.
Unsurprisingly, on its first use, the improved efficiency allowed SpaceX to process a booster faster than any before it, breaking the previous record of ~1.9 days from port arrival to departure on a horizontal transporter. Now, B1059 is already on pace to beat B1058’s weeks-old recovery turnaround record. Extra-efficient recovery processing and the unprecedentedly rapid booster reuse it could soon enable will be crucial if SpaceX hopes to sustain a cadence of 3-6 Falcon 9 launches per month over the next few years.
Such a cadence is a necessity for the expedient deployment of the 12,000 to 40,000-satellite Starlink internet constellation. With SpaceX all but guaranteed to demonstrate three Starlink launches in a single month (in fact, less than three weeks), the company is making rapid progress in the right direction.
Speeding through recovery
In fact, as of writing, Falcon 9 B1059 has already had all four landing legs retracted and was lifted off drone ship OCISLY, broken over, and placed on SpaceX’s custom booster transporter less than 10 hours after it arrived in port. A step further, SpaceX took an incredible 8-9 hours after docking to bring the booster horizontal, crushing the previous record – ~27 hours – by a factor of three or more.
Given that unprecedented expediency, it wouldn’t be crazy to imagine that SpaceX could be aiming for a record-breaking booster turnaround on one of its next few Starlink launches, scheduled June 22nd and sometime in July. Held by the late booster B1056, SpaceX’s current turnaround record (the time between two launches) is 62 days, while the company and CEO Elon Musk’s ultimate reusability goal is to fly the same booster twice in just 24 hours.
Drone ship recoveries, of course, will almost always require at least a few extra days to travel back to port. Still, the fact that 99% of the processing needed to transport a booster can now be finished in as few as ~8 hours is the first unequivocal proof that a 24-hour turnaround is within SpaceX’s reach – so long as the rocket lands on land or the time in transit is excluded.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
Turn-by-turn navigation is not new technology.
For over two decades, drivers have relied on Garmin, TomTom, and later smartphone apps like Google Maps and Waze to receive precise, reliable directions. These systems have guided millions safely through unfamiliar cities, highways, and backroads with remarkable effectiveness. They handle real-time traffic, construction detours, and complex intersections with minimal fuss.
Yet Tesla, the company that promised revolutionary Full Self-Driving (FSD), continues to struggle with this foundational capability. As FSD (Supervised) v14.3.4 has started rolling out to cars this week, navigation remains its glaring Achilles’ heel, undermining the entire autonomous vision.
Tesla Summon got insanely good in FSD v14.3.2 — Navigation? Not so much
Tesla’s FSD excels in many driving behaviors—smooth acceleration, confident lane changes in ideal conditions, and responsive handling of visible obstacles. However, when it comes to following a route accurately, the system falters repeatedly.
Owners report wrong turns, missed exits, inefficient routing through local roads instead of highways, phantom speed limit errors, and even directing vehicles to building rear entrances. Interventions for navigation issues often outnumber those for core driving maneuvers. Tesla has begun surveying owners specifically about these errors, acknowledging the problem after years of complaints.
Navigation is perhaps my biggest complaint when it comes to FSD, because sometimes, we do know better. Some of us have been living in our areas for our entire lives, but even those who have not have years or even decades of experience driving on local roads. We might know a little better about routing.
But the navigation mistakes are more than just FSD potentially taking a slightly different route that may or may not save you a few minutes. Sometimes, they’re genuinely mind-boggling.
This isn’t just annoying; it cascades into broader failures. A flawed route plan confuses the AI’s decision-making, leading to hesitant behavior, unnecessary disengagements, or dangerous maneuvers like attempting impossible U-turns or ignoring clear ramps. In a system meant to operate with minimal supervision, unreliable navigation erodes trust.
More often than not, false or plain incorrect navigation is what causes me to interrupt FSD operation. Unfortunately, I believe the latest FSD version is the worst example of it, and it leads me to believe that Tesla might be making some changes; they’ve just made them in the wrong direction.
It makes you wonder: Why is a company that has done so much with the progress of FSD and autonomy struggling so much with navigation, something that is not new and has been around a long time?
Multiple Data Sources
First, Tesla’s navigation relies on a fragile patchwork of multiple data sources—Google Maps, TomTom, OpenStreetMap, Valhalla, and its own fleet-derived data—stitched together rather than a single authoritative map. When these conflict on lane geometry, road status, or turn details, the system hesitates or chooses incorrectly.
Traditional GPS providers maintain centralized, regularly validated databases with professional curation and rapid updates. Tesla’s hybrid approach, while innovative in crowdsourcing, introduces inconsistencies that a purely vision-based or end-to-end AI approach may not easily reconcile in real time.
Persistent Learning
FSD seems to struggle with persistent learning from driver interventions.
Unlike consumer apps that quickly adapt to repeated corrections or user preferences (e.g., avoiding certain routes or remembering habitual detours), Tesla’s FSD often fails to internalize fixes on the same trip or across similar scenarios. Owners note making the same manual override multiple times without the routing engine updating its behavior meaningfully.
This stems from the neural architecture prioritizing real-time perception and control over long-term route memory and personalization, making navigation feel rigid and “opinionated” compared to the adaptive logic in Waze or Google Maps.
I noticed that when I asked Grok to try and get me home a certain way (a way that FSD routinely took in the past because it was the most efficient), it had to place a waypoint between my location at the time and my house. When I went to edit the waypoint out, as Grok had placed it for a way to get FSD to get off the highway at the right exit, it was stumped again, rerouted, and took a longer way home.
The next thing I’ve noticed, and this might be controversial, is that Nav has gotten even worse.
I think that might actually be a good thing; Tesla seems to be adjusting it. They just need to adjust it the opposite way.
The car is taking extremely strange routes to very… https://t.co/UHg3tVfNA2
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 16, 2026
Reasoning, Scaling, and Intuition
Third, scaling navigation for unsupervised or robotaxi ambitions requires not just accuracy but adaptability and user-like reasoning. Current FSD often defaults to single routes that ignore driver preferences or real-world nuances like time-of-day traffic patterns. It fails to match the intuitive, context-aware planning that traditional systems have refined over the years.
Resolving navigation is critical for several reasons. Practically, it is the backbone of any autonomous journey: without trustworthy routing, the car cannot reliably reach destinations, rendering FSD useless for robotaxis or hands-free commutes. Safety depends on it—mismatched plans create hesitation in merges or intersections, increasing accident risk.
Economically, Tesla’s valuation and future hinge on FSD delivering unsupervised driving; persistent navigation flaws delay regulatory approval and erode consumer confidence. For owners who paid premiums for FSD, these issues represent unfulfilled promises. While it is unlikely Tesla will lose too many customers due to bad navigation, some will be frustrated with the constant need for human input.
Tesla has achieved miracles in electric vehicles and battery tech. Mastering turn-by-turn—technology Garmin nailed in the early 2000s—should not be this hard. By investing in tighter data integration, faster learning loops from interventions, and more intuitive routing algorithms, Tesla could close this gap.
Until then, FSD’s navigation struggles highlight a humbling truth: even the most ambitious innovator must sometimes master the basics before conquering the future.
A Tesla Cybertruck driver in the United Kingdom had their all-electric pickup seized by local police in the Greater Manchester area after the department cited “legitimate concerns.”
Last Thursday, police saw the pickup on the roads and decided to pull the driver over. Greater Manchester Police said:
“Whilst this may seem trivial to some, legitimate concerns exist around the safety of other road users or pedestrians if they were involved in a collision with the Cybertruck.”
🚨 A Tesla Cybertruck, which is illegal to drive in the UK due to safety concerns, has been seized by police in Greater Manchester
“Whilst this may seem trivial to some, legitimate concerns exist around the safety of other road users or pedestrians if they were involved in a… pic.twitter.com/cqhdPok3DM
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 16, 2026
The Cybertruck in question was, according to the BBC, registered and insured abroad and was confiscated. The driver, who is a UK resident, was reported.
The Greater Manchester Police Department then added:
“The Tesla Cybertruck is not road-legal in the UK and does not hold a certificate of conformity.”
The Cybertruck cannot be legally driven in the UK because it has no UK Type Approval for operation in the country. This is due to some safety concerns, which are related to its angular shape and design. The stainless steel exoskeleton has sharp edges and projections that violate UK/EU rules on pedestrian protection.
Tesla has considered creating what it referred to as an “international version” that would be approved for operation in Europe. However, there has been no real movement on that front by the company, as it has been focused on the Robotaxi rollout primarily.
A new report claims that Apple is in the process of developing what would be the missing link for Tesla to get CarPlay.
Apple and Tesla have been reportedly working together for some time to give Tesla owners the opportunity to utilize CarPlay within their vehicles. While many owners are more than happy with Tesla’s in-house UI, which is seamless, effective, and smooth, some still want CarPlay, which does have its advantages.
A report from 9to5Mac now states that a new CarPlay technology that was highlighted during the Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) would potentially be the bridge between Tesla and Apple. With the addition of a feature known as “Route Sharing,” which gives a navigation app the ability to share routing data with the vehicle, Tesla would be able to launch CarPlay in its vehicles, the report states.
CarPlay has not been a priority for Tesla because it has done extremely well with its in-house UI, but some drivers are just used to it. Additionally, it could improve Tesla’s subpar Navigation or offer improved app capabilities, especially with iMessage.
Route Sharing is an intended addition to CarPlay’s iteration in iOS 26.4, which was released in March:
The addition of CarPlay would undoubtedly be welcome, but at the same time, it seems like Tesla realizes it is not of the utmost priority. There are so many things that Tesla is working on currently within its own vehicles, especially attempting to solve self-driving.
Back in February, Bloomberg had reported that Tesla was still working on bringing CarPlay to its vehicles, but it had not due to app compatibility issues and incredibly low adoption rates of iOS 26.
This bottleneck could buy Tesla the proper amount of time to develop CarPlay for its vehicles. It would be a welcome addition, and could be brought on with either the Summer or Fall 2026 Software Updates.
Tesla’s Navigation Nightmare: Why the easiest part of FSD might be the hardest
Tesla Cybertruck driver gets pickup seized for ‘legitimate concerns’ in UK
